Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hey Guys, Listen Up - Trouble Coming.....

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DeputyMarshal
    replied
    Originally posted by BSFD9302 View Post
    I try my best to not offend or aggravate anyone on here because it just causes turmoil. I that I had, so that is the reason for the apology.
    No aggravation here. No worries.

    Leave a comment:


  • BSFD9302
    replied
    Originally posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    Indeed. And if I were to pick just one, it wouldn't be Firehouse.
    Then I'm amazed you've never heard of CERCLA aka "Superfund;" the "S" in SARA.
    Never hit me. We are under guidance through state KYERC, County EM and State Fire Commission here already that I guess i never dealt that far into it. They are all excellent groups and had no real need for anything more.

    I am sorry if my opinions on this have touched a nerve with you.
    Huh?
    I try my best to not offend or aggravate anyone on here because it just causes turmoil. I that I had, so that is the reason for the apology.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputyMarshal
    replied
    Originally posted by BSFD9302 View Post
    Firehouse is not the only medium to find information.
    Indeed. And if I were to pick just one, it wouldn't be Firehouse.

    Well actually I am not new to the fire service and we "deal" with HazMat quite often given the industry in our district. I also deal with SARA and the corresponding reports for my FD.
    Then I'm amazed you've never heard of CERCLA aka "Superfund;" the "S" in SARA.

    And if a Federal legislation is passed limiting the ability for FD to recover funds...
    Read the article. The prospective -- not yet even proposed -- legislation is to amend CERCLA. That would have no effect on any state or local authority to levy fees. It would just limit abuse of CERCLA as an authorization to steal.

    I am sorry if my opinions on this have touched a nerve with you.
    Huh?

    I am simply expressing my own opinions on the matter. And yes I will also be watching for a copy of the Bill to become available.
    So far it hasn't actually been proposed and may never get that far. We'll have to see if anyone is able to come up with a draft version.

    Leave a comment:


  • BSFD9302
    replied
    Originally posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    Did you read the article that launched this thread? There's no indication that anyone is trying to limit FD's from billing for service; only to limit using CERCLA as carte blanche to authorize unlimited billing. That's a federal issue. It can't be fixed anywhere else.

    Really? Then presumably you're quite new to the fire service or have never dealt with hazmat. CERCLA and its successor SARA are enormously important pieces of federal legislation to the fire service particularly with regard to hazmat.

    Then this bill probably has nothing to do with you.
    Firehouse is not the only medium to find information.

    Well actually I am not new to the fire service and we "deal" with HazMat quite often given the industry in our district. I also deal with SARA and the corresponding reports for my FD. And if a Federal legislation is passed limiting the ability for FD to recover funds then my state KRS and county ordinances are not worth the parer they are written on. So yes it does affect my FD.

    I am sorry if my opinions on this have touched a nerve with you. I am simply expressing my own opinions on the matter. And yes I will also be watching for a copy of the Bill to become available.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputyMarshal
    replied
    Originally posted by BSFD9302 View Post
    Yes CERCLA is a federal issue and should only be used what it was intended for. What is not a Federal issue is limiting FD from billing for service.
    Did you read the article that launched this thread? There's no indication that anyone is trying to limit FD's from billing for service; only to limit using CERCLA as carte blanche to authorize unlimited billing. That's a federal issue. It can't be fixed anywhere else.

    Up until this post I never even heard of CERCLA.
    Really? Then presumably you're quite new to the fire service or have never dealt with hazmat. CERCLA and its successor SARA are enormously important pieces of federal legislation to the fire service particularly with regard to hazmat.

    We do bill but not under CERCLA. It is under our KRS and county ordinance.
    Then this bill probably has nothing to do with you.

    Leave a comment:


  • BSFD9302
    replied
    Originally posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    Of course it's a federal issue. CERCLA is federal legislation. The only way to limit billing under CERCLA is to revise CERCLA. That can only happen at the federal level.
    Yes CERCLA is a federal issue and should only be used what it was intended for. What is not a Federal issue is limiting FD from billing for service. Up until this post I never even heard of CERCLA. We do bill but not under CERCLA. It is under our KRS and county ordinance. If an amendment or new Bill is introduced it should not involve anything more than the use of CERCLA and not limit the abilities of FD or any other emergency agency to recover excess costs which initially this Bill seems to be heading in that direction. More especially nothing that should solely please insurance companies.

    Leave a comment:


  • FirefighterBo
    replied
    Maybe the bill is necessary. I just don't understand why any homeowner should be hit with a $28,000 freaking bill for services after this kind of tragedy. However, since the expenses of the FD need to be handled one way or the other. Either the insurance company is not covering enough of the expense or local government is not accounting for fire protection in their tax rates or both. This should be addressed by one or both of these entities.

    Insurance companies can make the adjustments to account for these types of expenses. For example, an insurance company can set separate limits for mitigation expense or they can adjust rates if the current rates don't already account for it. I know some already provide coverage for FD fees.

    The government can perform there own studies to determine how much separate tax would allow them to fund fire protection without separate billing to the home/business owners.

    Either way this ultimately comes out of the pocket of the home/business owner but would you rather that or a $28,000 bill when you just lost your home?

    By the way, I think $28,000 is outrageous and so is the 22 percent billing fee...
    Last edited by FirefighterBo; 07-20-2010, 04:36 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputyMarshal
    replied
    Originally posted by BSFD9302 View Post
    It, in my opinion, is not a Federal issue.
    Of course it's a federal issue. CERCLA is federal legislation. The only way to limit billing under CERCLA is to revise CERCLA. That can only happen at the federal level.

    Leave a comment:


  • hwoods
    replied
    I Will.........

    You can bet I'll read it, as soon as I get a copy, which has been requested....

    Leave a comment:


  • BSFD9302
    replied
    Originally posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    How do you know it sucks? Have you read it? From the sound of it, it may very well be a very good idea to plug a loophole available to unscrupulous billing practices.

    Why is it federal? Because CERCLA is federal. How else would you revise a federal law but with a federal bill to revise it?
    Actually no I have not read the entire Bill as I do not have that much time but I have looked at other websites other than Firehouse for information and everything I can gather, it sucks. Now how is it federal? If it goes before US Congress / US Senate. It is Federal. How else for Federal Law to be revised than by a Federal Bill? Well I go back to my original point. It, in my opinion, is not a Federal issue. Let me ask, have you read the entire Bill? Has anyone posting in this thread read the entire Bill?

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputyMarshal
    replied
    Originally posted by BSFD9302 View Post
    This bill sucks. First off why is this a federal issue?
    How do you know it sucks? Have you read it? From the sound of it, it may very well be a very good idea to plug a loophole available to unscrupulous billing practices.

    Why is it federal? Because CERCLA is federal. How else would you revise a federal law but with a federal bill to revise it?

    Leave a comment:


  • BSFD9302
    replied
    This is our wonderful Economic Recovery Act BS working for us. Let's layoff as many people as we can, pass laws where the insurance companies benefit, and then make everyone a ward of the state. And let's not forget have the Fed Reserve loan money to banks at next to nothing and then let them charge outlandish rates to loan it to businesses. That will sure help the economic recovery. But Lord forbid that the FDs attempt to recover some expenses.

    This bill sucks. First off why is this a federal issue? Somewhere States Rights have been lost. Federal issues should be something that affects the entire countries well being, not the well being of insurance companies.

    UUUGGGHHHH, this crap is P***ING me off and there is very little I can do. I do what I can but that is not enough because who cares what the people want. Unless of course you are one of those people that have billions in the pocket.

    Leave a comment:


  • FiremanLyman
    replied
    Originally posted by Itshotinhere View Post
    Therein is the problem... is the next batch of clowns going to be any better?
    To quote The Who; "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

    Leave a comment:


  • fireeaterbob
    replied
    Originally posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    Frankly, after reviewing the article again, I'm not sure it's such a bad thing. We'd need to see the proposed legislation to be sure.
    THIS IS AN ABERATION!!!!!!
    ONE (expletitive) fire company and one crappy billing agency sent a COMPLETELY unreasonable bill for services.

    Indiana has a general insurance fee (I think) for $500......NOT (expletitive) $28,000!!!!!!! !!!!!! (expletitive) !!!!!!!

    Many of the smaller departments that get their budget cut EVERY SINGLE YEAR by the state board of accounts need..YES NEED...this measley $500 to keep the doors open. MOST departments SOFT BILL. If the insurance company doesn't pay, they don't pursue.

    OF COURSE the insurance institute is for this... I wouldn't wanna pay if I did not have to.

    This is a KNEE JERK reaction to an aberation...

    One bad apple spoils the whole damn bunch....

    Leave a comment:


  • Itshotinhere
    replied
    Originally posted by ScareCrow57 View Post
    I didn't elect one of those fools. In the case of my representative to congress, my senators Schumer and Clinton (replaced by Gillibrand), the Governor, and the President, I did not vote for one of those clowns. I voted for the other clown instead.
    Therein is the problem... is the next batch of clowns going to be any better?

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X